中國主權的範圍與中國研究的範圍是一體兩面；科學傳入中國的歷史和用科學來 研究中國，也是一體兩面；西洋公民文化的理想及人們對中國公民文化的分析，更是一體的 兩面。中國人接納科學觀念本來沒有心理障礙，但是帝國主義的入侵突出了倫理與科學的矛 盾，可惜在西洋科學語言無法表達這一種衝突，使得中國人對天下觀的迷戀與對國家觀的模 糊，就表現成是一個西化不完全的地區。既然當代中國的領導人與知識界毫無保留地接受了 主權秩序，只好承認自己在主權世界中相對邊緣的位置，既怨恨國人不能積極主動，則每每 要訴諸民族情緒來動員中國人，反而加深西方的疑懼，形成文明衝突的惡性循環。依此推論 ，每一篇中國研究的科學論文都是關於文明立場的政治宣示，延續了西方對科學與公民的想 像，致研究者疏離於真實的自已，故是對本土研究者之壓迫。只有在倫理關係中體會中國， 才不會淪為西方替中國定位的媒介。

　　　　　From a postcolonial critical perspective, I argue that the notions of science, China studies, civic culture and sovereignty are historically and conceptually intertwined. The history of science and colonialism developed together. After they came to China, the Chinese people struggled to learn the doctrine of science in order to counter colonialism. China became an objective field of study once the Chinese accepted the notion of state sovereignty and turned their culture into a piece of territory. Since the key to the rise of contemporary Western sovereign states is their liberal, civic culture, China studies typically focus also on the evolution （ or the stagnation ） of Chinese civic culture. This civic approach to China studies naturally defines China in an inferior position and is supported by a liberal science which the Chinese "Western" state has no conceptual means to refute. Consequently, all Taiwanese work on China must also take this Western, scientific, liberal position and alienae the researchers from their subject of study. Politically, this compels them to create a sovereign, civic illusion for themselves in order to understand China from an objective, outside position.